Debt Assignment

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Is it not also the case that the debtor has a copy of the agreement

from the start!!

Alan I'm am sure that you are much Holier than I.

[Jamesx81x]

What if it is mis-laid? Lost in house move etc whole number of reasons

 

It is more expected of a large organisation to be better equipped at filing these documents or loading them onto computer systems as is common practice today.. Is it not also expected under the Data Protection Act that the data be kept for 6 years? Why do companies have such trouble in been able to forward you a copy of an agreement then if so.

 

Then there is the default notice issue. CCA clearly states one needs to be issued in perscribed form in order for further action to be taken. So creditor goes to court saying yes we issued it but have no copy..what else other than their word does the court have they did in fact issue one..? Also how can they prove it was as required by the CCA if they have no copy therefore can prove they legally held the right to bring legal action against the individual.

 

To side with a creditor in this instance makes a mockery of what the regualtions say and what they are actually there for. It is not a case of ignoring your debts so dont even go there. There will always be some that play the system as in anything in life but what this is aimed at who find theirselves in this position through no fault of their own then get banged with a CCJ just to help them along a bit..

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

The one important point that has not been mentioned is that English Civil Law

is based on what if fair in the eyes of the common man and the balance of

probabilites unlike criminal law, the evidence is more flexible and judges have

to make decisions often based on the balance of probabilities and in the face

of evidence of useage of a credit facility and perhaps a reconstituted agreement

the judge will find for the claimant.

It was said many years ago ''that rules are for the obedience of Fools but for

the guidance of wise men.

[Jamesx81x]

Yes true and understand the points you have just raised but the consumer contract regulations accompanied by the consumer credit act are clear in what they say and thats where judges that have allowed reconstitued agreements in court that have made it easy for creditors to bend things.

 

The CCR state everything that should be included in an agreement for it to be valid and so do the OFT's publications on contract requirements. No where in any of these does it state 'reconstituted agreements'.

 

So how can any judge go against these and deem it acceptable.

 

A good example is

 

Alfie(excuse the name) goes to court, says yes judge i do owe the money and am trying to pay what i can afford but i do not beleive i should have been brought to court as the creditor cannot supply me with an agreement and default notice upon request.

 

Creditor goes here is a mock up as we dont have originals. Couldnt be bothered to look after em and yes we have breached the DPA by not keeping the data for 6 years etc etc

 

Judge goes yes creditor Judgement awarded Alfie have a CCJ to mess you up even more.

 

Wheres the fairness in that? And also this is what those regulations stated were put in place to prevent. Not protect non-payers

[dadofholly]

Who said dont pay its you thats saying that.

 

But if a creditor can go to court with no documentation, cannot even prove that the default notice is issued as perscribed and in accordance with the CCA get a CJJ against the debtor where is the protection for the consumer in that?

 

Is the CCA that clearly states it nothing to do with what i beleive, think you need to stop asuming people are trying to avoid their debts and see that regulations have been wriiten for a reason - to stop things like above

 

If a company canot be bothered to keep their documentation in order with all the systems that are in place this day an age why should they get the easy ride in court?

 

Ask the Courts - most of us do not disagree with that view - and you can still argue this in court - will depend on the judge.

 

But thats not what was stated in some posts when incorrect information is given it needs correcting - so others are not misled.

[dadofholly]

James - the OFT have issued guidance on those issues, in response to the Carey ruling.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

CASE LAW JAMES perhaps you should take a look at some of the

matters that have from case law made the absence of or marginally

faulty paperwork being a way of avoiding a debt, the civil law in

England can change almot on a daily basis as said before the fairness

and balance of posibilities not the strict proof of criminal law.

Start with Carey and follow on come back when you have read it.

[phaitun]

Some really intersting points made on this one, my points regarding EHCR are aimed purely at the transfer, retention and storage of my data, it is not a commodity to be sold on, its my perosnal information.

 

Yes we may have been informed of the transfer of data at the outset of an agreement, online applications in the small print and similar situations, however it is my belief that Human Rights laws, especially the right to privacy and how the financial institutions/DCA's have not informed the consumer as to the effect of these rights when they default is a whole new cock up by the financial institutions, DCA's and other agencies.

 

Like we have been misold PPI, been charged unfairly by the banks we have also been mislead as to the effect of ticking that DPA box on an agreement thus allowing the whole plethora of pondlife to come chasing you in the case of late, missed and/or defaulted payments.

 

It is accepted widely on this forum that we will not seek to avoid debts, however it is also more widely accepted that there are laws to protect us as consumers.

IMO ECHR acts gives us wider protection from these 'debt chasers' with regards to our private information and it seems there is either a reluctance to use this protection or as has been posted by some of the Cagger's who are more experienced than most we are barking up the wrong tree.

 

The greatest laws of this land are being overturned by ECHR every day.

 

I cant get my head around the fact that the public authorities have a very hard time trying to justify intrusions on the private life of criminals, yet the financial industry/DCA's etc can do it against a cusotmer/consumer/victim on the 'word' of another financial institution, without any justification or a body to monitor their actions.

 

I would argue that the DPA legalise writen into some of these documents no longer fits into current EHCR laws.

 

Human Rights has changed the way this country is Policed, protected and monitored beyond recognition in the last ten years, sadly the financial industry, with all its 'dirty tricks' has not kept up with such legislation and due to their complete disregard for their customers i guess it will take another ruling like that for mis-selling PPI , endowments and the unfair practices to really sit up and start 'respecting' their customers.

 

I am not advocating a 'free for all' Human Rights loophole to avoid paying debts, however there needs to be a safeguard of our private information.

 

If the DCA's buy the debt for a pittance, then they should also suffer the hardship of 'starting' again with regards to chasing it and IMO should not have access to our phone numbers, addresses, vehilce registrations, previous and current addresses, work telephone numbers and addresses and also CRA's,

 

CRA files should be used solely by the FI's to assess suitability for their products and nothing else. How is it right that the DCA's use this as a means of tracing us, accessing our data and then telling us they believe that we are in a better financial state than we led them to believe so they can demand higher payments.

 

This is a flagrant abuse of our right to privacy and i have read many a post on this forum, and others whereby persons as well as myself have been victims of this 'CRA file searching' as a method of tracing and chasing by the DCA's.

 

It is not beyond the realms of possibility that the OC and Financial Institutions will also pass on the Account numbers of the debtors CRA files as well as the other documents they have when they sell it on, just to make it easier for themselves and their valued customers.

Edited April 10, 2012 by phaitun

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

English Civil Law and its' statutes are changed by case law and as such

evolve and change, no mount of posturing about what is laid down in an

original statute is going to change the fact that a a certain level a judges

decision becomes LAW.

[phaitun]

*above post was editied, with addition of comments.

Keyboard not keeping up with typing:razz:

[Jamesx81x]

Yeah thanks Brigadier you even shouted case law as well well done

 

Not much need in the arrogance really which you have shown all along must be cold up there on your perch hey

 

I do apologise profundly that i am a lowly Fire Fighter and can only admit to saving lives for a living rather than make sure i am 100% up to date on case law civil law and the likes.

 

I am well aware of the Carey case beleive it or not i managed to read it all by myself - just dont agree with it

 

Maybe you could give us you r reasons as to why you beleive this to be fair when it shafts the innocent parties just as much as the non payers.

 

Sorry to others for the little touch of sarcasm in this post but sometimes the attiude you get in here from so called site team is nothing short of arrogant to those who know less on matters than some

 

You only seem interested in seeing things as away of debt avoidance rather than the rights and wrongs of the debt collection industry

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I have the greatest admiration for fire fighters, paramedics and the police

as a retired front line officer who has tried to help personnel who don't get

the benefits or any where near the wages and time off that the civilian services

are getting I wonder what you have to complain about, compare your pay

and benefits to those of a young serviceman or woman of 18 -19 years

in a front line situation a rookie cop earns far more and has more benefits.

We are free to express opinons as are all here.

The law statute or case law is open in this country to interpretation by judges

and is modified and changed to fit the circumstances of each individual case.

I am very aware of the consequences of debt collection having dealt with

bereaved families being pursude by DCAS within days of a loved ones funeral.

Take note of that the next time your union is talking strike action for more

pay, my colleagues and comrades cannot strike and leave innocent people at

risk.

As to sarcasm it is and always will be the lowest form of wit.

[coledog]

Can anyone remember what the original question was here please??

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

NO!!! I'll post no more!!

[phaitun]

this has turned a little personal guys, nobody's job has more merit you both do/have done a great service, no need to compare wages, conditions etc.

 

Thats not the argument, i too am a public servant, i deal with ehcr issues every day, drafting/sorting out/submitting/gatekeeping authorities to engage human rights of privacy on behalf of a public body amongst other things.

 

i know how the ehcr has changed my job in the past ten years and that of friends in other agencies.

 

the issue is that Article 6 ehcr is not/has not been used as a stick to beat the corruption out of the DCA industry, yet it has been twisted to suit the whims of the vilest in society.

 

It is one of the most powerful legal entities we as joe public/consumers has at our disposal, just cant understand why it hasnt been used? Also why there is so much resistance to trying it?

 

Maybe a case for a full claim against a DCA for using the debtors CRA file as a tracing tool, including some of the letters that contain terms like 'we have recieved information that your financial circumstances may have changed and you are in a better position to repay more of this debt' which actually means 'we have been spying on your credit files on the say so of our boss, we dont believe what you told us, so pay up'

[phaitun]

Any human rights lawyers here as Caggers?

[dadofholly]

This issue is some people seem not to understand that their 'personal' views - on particular laws/cases they dont like do not matter in a court. Only the law matters - like it or not.

 

It does not help when people state things as being irrelevant when they themselves are incorrect - and take exeption to this being pointed out.

 

CAG is a good place to LEARN.

[brokebutnotbeatn]

What we agree with, the fairness or otherwise is not the issue. This site is about learning and being able to formulate a personal debt management strategy based on what is happening in the industry. Fortunately I am not hounded or chased by DCAs because I mange my debt in a particular way. If I change my tactics then I might well be and this site helps people based on individual circumstances.

[rdm2006]

I personally know very little of this sort of thing.

 

What I would like to know is that in the cca parliament appear to have attempted to limit what a judge can do (I refer to the part below)

 

 

The courts are allowed to issue enforcement orders for cases where the contract has been infringed upon, except in situations where the contract has not been signed or the terms are not set out in the contract, in which case they are permanently unenforceable. The courts are also prohibited from making enforcement orders

 

If a contract is not produced then how can they say that the above has been adhered to ???

[brokebutnotbeatn]

This comes back to the defendant being able to succintly point the judge to the relevant case law. It's about being prepared and well researched. In most / many cases it's about the defendent knowing the law as it pertains to their particular circumstances better than the judge.

[Jamesx81x]

Dadofholly they are not all personal views some are interpretations, if people want to correct that those are incorrect than so be it, it will be taken on board to better understand things

 

But as far as some go they do this with complete arrogance and there is no need really, it is more than one over that course of these posts that have picked up on it too.

 

Nether the less enough said on that.

 

If everyone goes baack to the first 10 posts you will see how far this has steered away from what i was getting at. The fairness of how consumers are treat by creditors and DCA's , the easy ride creditors seem to have been given due to recent cases and it all seems to be sliding in favour of the creditors. If this is the case why not do away with the CCA and not have any regulations at all.

 

What i do find interesting is rdm2006 posted above, if this is the case then how were the courts allowed to go against it?

 

I understand all decisions in the higher courts are binding on the lower courts and so forth but if there is staute there to start with why is not followed. Why are judges allowed to go along changing things willy nilly. Yes they have power but law is law and even above judges.

 

And its rdm's post i refer to before people start going on one

[brokebutnotbeatn]

I think the issue is the judges don't know everything. The cases that are lost are often associated with poor preparation (not all though) and a misplaced assumption that the judge will know all the ins and outs of consumer law...

[reginald perrin]

James's original thread seems to have come a long way.

All he appeared to want an answer to was, "Why do the OC'c sell the block of debts (in some cases someone stated as little as 6% )

to a DCA without first offering individuals the chance to clear the amount?" At least you would feel better about it, if you could you could afford to.

What followed was the right or wrong of being told how much the debt was bought for.

Information personal only to the debtor which would have given guidance as to how much to offer perhaps to another OC if in a postion to do so.

By the act alone of accepting enough from the CRA to be satisfied the OC have received enough to cover what ever expenses they have been left.

They would no doubt if treating the debtor fairly and correctly could and would accept a slighly larger amount.

Unfortunately this will not happen because through their greed in the first instance they have dug a hole so large they cannot get out of it!

[dadofholly]

This comes back to the defendant being able to succintly point the judge to the relevant case law. It's about being prepared and well researched. In most / many cases it's about the defendent knowing the law as it pertains to their particular circumstances better than the judge.

 

Spot on.

[dadofholly]

James's original thread seems to have come a long way.

All he appeared to want an answer to was, "Why do the OC'c sell the block of debts (in some cases someone stated as little as 6% )

to a DCA without first offering individuals the chance to clear the amount?" At least you would feel better about it, if you could you could afford to.

What followed was the right or wrong of being told how much the debt was bought for.

Information personal only to the debtor which would have given guidance as to how much to offer perhaps to another OC if in a postion to do so.

By the act alone of accepting enough from the CRA to be satisfied the OC have received enough to cover what ever expenses they have been left.

They would no doubt if treating the debtor fairly and correctly could and would accept a slighly larger amount.

Unfortunately this will not happen because through their greed in the first instance they have dug a hole so large they cannot get out of it!

 

Tthe reason creditors do not routinley make you an offer to pay off your debts - at a rate comparable to the price they sell them for - is the process will simply become abused. (Rankins come to mind) - if every one clocks on to the fact that by not paying your loan back - the creditor will eventually offer them a huge discount - then people will simply not pay their instalments - and wait for the offer from the creditor.